Is not attack on South Korea an attack on USA?

by Maswood Alam Khan from Maryland, USA
December 1, 2010

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1140/is-not-attack-on-south-korea-an-attack-on-usa

When asked by a correspondent in an interview with ABC News "Is not attack on South Korea an attack on the US?" US President Barack Obama replied: "South Korea has been our ally since the Korean War and we strongly affirm our commitment to defend South Korea as part of that alliance". But when he was asked "Would you put US troops on alert?" Obama stammered a little bit as he said: "I am not going to speculate on military action at this stage, but would consult with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, on the crisis".

The world attention is now focused on what is going to happen in the Korean peninsula as tensions are apparently reaching the boiling point in the cape after North Korea early Tuesday shelled at the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong, killing two South Korean soldiers and wounding 18 soldiers and civilians and prompting an exchange of fire between the two sides, involving around 175 artillery shells and lasting about an hour. The North Korean attack was the first on a civilian area of South Korea since the Korean War.

North Korea however accused South Korea of having started the exchange by firing shells inside the North Korean territory during a set of South Korean military exercises and the South Korea denied that charge, saying that its soldiers were merely conducting military drills and that no shots fell in North Korean territory.

North Korea has also issued a new warning on US-South Korea military exercises, set to start on Sunday. The four days of exercises include the USS George Washington aircraft carrier and its battle group. North Korea's official KCNA news agency said: "If the US brings its carrier to the West Sea of Korea (Yellow Sea), no-one can predict the ensuing consequences."

This latest spike in hostilities between South Korea and North Korea, the two old adversaries, may, God forbid, turn into an escalation in rivalry between USA and China with 28,000 US military personnel stationed in South Korea, a longtime ally of America, and with China, a longtime backer of North Korea, watching how South Korea backed by America now reacts while North Korea is believed to have already 8 to 12 nuclear bombs in its lethal arsenal.

The United States, Britain and Japan have already condemned the North Korean attack, with America calling on the North to "halt its belligerent action". China said it was "concerned" while Russia has urged restraint and a peaceful solution to the crisis.

Tensions in the Korean peninsula have actually been simmering high since last March, when a South Korean naval vessel was sunk in the same area, killing 46 South Korean sailors. It is widely believed that a North Korean torpedo had attacked the South Korean vessel, though the North Korea denied its involvement. Then again early this month, the South Korean navy fired warning shots at a North Korean fishing boat after the craft wandered across the border. The North Korean boat however recoiled back after hearing the firing shots.

Some analysts believe Tuesday's action by North Korea was to exert leverage over America and South Korea with a threat: "Give food and aid or face the horror of war". North Korea's such muscle-flexing is their old ploy, their long-term strategy of maneuvering their way to the negotiating table, extracting concessions, and then repeating the same process time and again.

Such North Korean menace sounds like a kind of a threat a naughty child sometimes poses to his mother saying 'either buy me the big toy or I will smash the best china in your showcase'.

North Korea is in a desperate situation and they need food immediately. But, Obama administration has refused to remove sanctions against the North, imposed in response to its nuclear program. After sensing that they can't exert much pressure on Washington any more, North Korean regime has perhaps taken South Korea hostage instead.

Other analysts believe Kim Jong Il, the North's ailing and reclusive leader, is eager to show to the world that he still holds sway over his military and hopes that as his successor his son, Kim Jong Un, who in September was promoted to the rank of four-star General, would follow his father's footsteps in employing the so-called "military first" approach to politics and turning the North Korean army into a so-called "pillar of the revolution", a concoction of revolution the father initiated and the son to continue only to retain the power base derived from the military.

The most important player who can defuse the present tension in the Korean peninsula is China. China holds all the big cards in this dangerous game of war. How China responds to this incident will determine how North Korea, which of late got a nickname as China's rebellious step-child, would behave: like a sober child or like a naughty child? Only China can stop North Korea, but, as one blogger put it, that's like asking a bald monk for a comb.

The exchange of fire between North and South Koreas is undoubtedly a casus belli but one can bet his last dollar that there would be no full-fledged war in the Korean peninsula as a war between two Koreas would lead to a conflict between China and USA - a war these two superpowers would loathe to get involved in.

Neither an action will be allowed for the United Nations to take against North Korea, as China will always be there to veto such an action.

Why not China should practice double standard diplomacy in the United Nations?

So, why should China not act similarly when North Korea, her own protégé state, behaves a little naughtily?

Related Topics:  Op-Ed and Editorial receive the latest by email: subscribe to weekly blitz's free mailing list